Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Apr 1;117(4):647-653.
doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001621.

Full-Thickness Scar Resection After R1/Rx Excised T1 Colorectal Cancers as an Alternative to Completion Surgery

Affiliations

Full-Thickness Scar Resection After R1/Rx Excised T1 Colorectal Cancers as an Alternative to Completion Surgery

Kim M Gijsbers et al. Am J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Introduction: Local full-thickness resections of the scar (FTRS) after local excision of a T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) with uncertain resection margins is proposed as an alternative strategy to completion surgery (CS), provided that no local intramural residual cancer (LIRC) is found. However, a comparison on long-term oncological outcome between both strategies is missing.

Methods: A large cohort of patients with consecutive T1 CRC between 2000 and 2017 was used. Patients were selected if they underwent a macroscopically complete local excision of a T1 CRC but positive or unassessable (R1/Rx) resection margins at histology and without lymphovascular invasion or poor differentiation. Patients treated with CS or FTRS were compared on the presence of CRC recurrence, a 5-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and metastasis-free survival.

Results: Of 3,697 patients with a T1 CRC, 434 met the inclusion criteria (mean age 66 years, 61% men). Three hundred thirty-four patients underwent CS, and 100 patients underwent FTRS. The median follow-up period was 64 months. CRC recurrence was seen in 7 patients who underwent CS (2.2%, 95% CI 0.9%-4.6%) and in 8 patients who underwent FTRS (9.0%, 95% CI 3.9%-17.7%). Disease-free survival was lower in FTRS strategy (96.8% vs 89.9%, P = 0.019), but 5 of the 8 FTRS recurrences could be treated with salvage surgery. The metastasis-free survival (CS 96.8% vs FTRS 92.1%, P = 0.10) and overall survival (CS 95.6% vs FTRS 94.4%, P = 0.55) did not differ significantly between both strategies.

Discussion: FTRS after local excision of a T1 CRC with R1/Rx resection margins as a sole risk factor, followed by surveillance and salvage surgery in case of CRC recurrence, could be a valid alternative strategy to CS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Tumours. DWGfG. Dutch Colorectal Cancer Guideline 2014. http://www.oncoline.nl/colorectaalcarcinoom .
    1. Hassan C, Wysocki PT, Fuccio L, et al. Endoscopic surveillance after surgical or endoscopic resection for colorectal cancer: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Digestive Oncology (ESDO) guideline. Endoscopy 2019;51:C1.
    1. Hashiguchi Y, Muro K, Saito Y, et al. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2019 for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2020;25:1–42.
    1. Zwager LW, Bastiaansen BAJ, Bronzwaer MES, et al. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) of colorectal lesions: Results from the Dutch colorectal eFTR registry. Endoscopy 2020;52:1014–23.
    1. Leicher LW, de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel WH, van Westreenen HL. Limited endoscopic-assisted wedge resection for excision of colon polyps. Dis Colon Rectum 2017;60:299–302.

Publication types